Skip to main content

About your Search

20130115
20130123
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
on various things with regard to economic reform, tax reform, immigration reform. i think that there's little doubt the president would be willing to compromise if the other party is willing to meet him part of the way. the other party job is to see how much it came at for its side and giving the issues we've been through, such as the fiscal cliff, the fact is there's no way out of these issues without compromise. i do think we will see compromise on something like immigration reform because democrat fixes destiny and the republicans as well as democrats recognize that they have to show some support for immigration reform if they're not going to in the case of republicans, lose the hispanic population permanently to the republican party. so the president has already, i believe, shown willingness to compromise and all that data show that republicans are the party has moved further to the right and democrats have moved to the left, although both have moved to the extreme. i think we're going to see the president because he won the election been tough for rhetorically about not compromising, alt
and the republicans in formulating that tax reduction legislation led to a budget surplus is the touchstone for success in working with the opposing parties to fulfill a president legislative agenda. clinton insightfully appointed erskine bowles to represent him in negotiations with congress. bulls great talent for bargaining was important in reaching the president's legislative agenda. but this is followed by the same house of representatives voting to an each bill clinton, obviously an extreme example, but the age-old conflict between congress and the executive branch of government and get bill clinton was lifted, only seven were elected presidents who were successful. there are lessons to be learned from the clinton's second term that might offer guidance to obama where he reelect me. some of the president to face hostility from congress feel the majority of their own party included washington, jefferson, monroe, grant, theodore roosevelt, johnson and bush. andrew jackson was censured by the congress controlled by democratic party. he never forgave. franklin roosevelt had a constant batt
the extension of the bush tax cuts, raising the debt limit, and the potential of automatic cuts in spending. necessity of resolving these issues is what chairman frank he refers to as the fiscal cliff. -- chairman bernanke. it's likely the decision will be given brief extensions so that the next president and congress will be saddled with making the decision. as a second term president, obama would face obstacles rarely experienced by a chief executive returning to office. where he would face sizable numbers of members of the senate and house, whose state they will not compromise. these present ominous clouds on the horizon for a second term for obama. other lessons that obama and the electorate can learn from the experience of presidential history that might give guidance for the resolution of this concern. first, however, it would be helpful to view obama's background in the customary evaluation of him. his opponents and some of his supporters ask, does barack obama have the leadership skills, experience, cultural background and temperament to deserve a second term as president of the uni
of the congress passed a step act in 1765, imposing a tax of the very size of every business license and legal document on up in the colonies, as well as every copy of every magazine and newspaper printed. not to mention every deck of playing cards, paradise employed by the county on lady luck to see them through hard times. the cries of outrage were heard all the ways across the atlantic. how could a government be so out of touch, colonists wanted? americans were already out of work, out of cash, and out of hope, burdened by sugar and molasses taxes, and sick and tired of an unwieldy bureaucracy rife with overpaid, incompetent, functionaries who had no interest in their struggle. colonists were taxed out, fed up, and demanding a sea change in the way their government operated. now, if this sounds like a recap, to some of the rhetoric has been flying across contemporary airwaves, it's little surprise. tough times have always made for tough politics. that there's one significant difference to keep in mind. in 1765, colonists had no hope, however illusory, that the next election or the other par
disposable income, exactly the kind of customers who bought for your stores and your tax base in the city. joe cortright also based in portland has done a lot of research into what that means and he took walk square based in seattle. raise your hand if you know about box score. most of you. reteach address in the world. i guess it's america. google maps data in terms of its workability. so joe cortright did a study and found it depends with 50 year reign, but every point is worth on average added 100 about $2000. every point on a 100-point scale figures in d.c. an empty lot is worth $200,000. people are paying more for these places. the premium for walkable housing versus drivable housing is about 50% in seattle, 150% of denver, 200%. the exact same footage rather than outside the city. seemed true for office rents. not the same ratios. in the d.c. area inside the beltway have jumped to 27% higher than the best office outside the city. so more and more people want this and they want to pay for it if your city has set for them. but the other great discussion called portland's workability d
a religious organization could own. some taxed religious property. others banned given groups' practices. i'm thinking, for example, eventually various states in the southwest banning polygamy, for example. >> host: so when it came to massachusetts, talk about massachusetts or pennsylvania. of we're here in pennsylvania, as a case study of states regulating religion. >> guest: sure. pennsylvania, for example, had an active blasphemy law which we would nowty of as -- now think of of as starkly unconstitutional. and the last case, um, that was brought, the last criminal prosecution under blasphemy law was actually brought in the early 1970s kind of by accident against someone who had a sign in his window saying something like "wanted: radical carpenter speaks to crowds preaching peace." and, on, this person meant jesus, but someone walking past thought it blasphemous and complained. the american civil liberties union got involved pretty quickly, and the prosecution was dropped. more recently, the, a film company own or tried to name -- owner tried to name his company i choose hell productions
in are not abroad so repatriating money that his tax back to the united states allowing us to create jobs here and maybe could be tied into creating an infrastructure bank or something like that the point is we need fundamental changes. believe it or not we care more than anything else about the health of the u.s. economy because that determines our future. we support the simpson -- it hurts everyone and it's painfully been for us but we need the stability and our finances as a country and every responsible business should stand up and say that. both sides republicans and democrats are recognizing the pain has to be spread around so those are big issues for us and their things that affect innovation. basically people don't produce anything but lawyers is not a good way to get a society and from the smallest to start up to the biggest company we need more certainty. and ginobli are violating patents and we shouldn't be putting people out of work and actively run companies if they don't even think there are breaking someone's patent. >> host: do a lot of members of congress fcc and other public
, think about that. as a statement of state power. they conscripted wan year. they pass taxes within basically year. and they had agent of the federal government all over the south. literally taking food out of people's barns. it was the only way they could feed the army. they impressed slave which was an enormous fight. it's an fascinating part of the story. slave holders go to war to protect slavely then they find out they think the new government is there to protect their slaves in war. as it turns out the federal government wants to and needs to use the slaves to win the war. it was enormous tussle between verne nt. they wrote a clause in the constitution that congress could never abolish slavery. they literally had a problem of sovereignty. they couldn't reach the slaves as male bodies to use for military labor. they couldn't reach them without the permission of the owner. they had code codified the status of slaves as private property. they had to live with that. can you imagine a lot of the slave holders were mortgaged up to the eye balls. they weren't interested to sending th
knowledge there were widespread allegations of unpaid taxes, misspent money, most people that i was talking to commendations did not care that much. they were much more interested in his promise as someone who had lived the dream to grow up for and moved to brooklyn then making it a huge to come back as a major star in and force. i have a conversation in the ng to a waiter ia waiter i said hoodoos' support? he said wyclef. he said i know but if he is american that means when he is elected president that means you all get a visa. [laughter] he said that. with the allegations that have only gotten worse with time, it is hard to say there is not proved that they are wrong there mostly based with paperwork for filings with the irs. then eyes way business is conducted in this country that at least there are five main agencies so normally when you have done something wrong if somebody goes to look for you have a paper trail. he seems to be caught up in that. when you talk to wyclef, a lot of people to agree he does have big dreams and he does want his organization to help life get better but that
repatriating money that's already taxed to the united states will boost our economy and allow us to create jobs here and maybe could be tie intoed creating an infrastructure bank, but we need some fundamental changes. belief it or not we care more than anything else about the health of the economy, so deficit reduction is really big for us. we support the simpson-bowles, we're the only association that does. it hurts etch, it's shared sacrifice, it's painful even for us but we need stability in our finances as a country, and every responsible business should stand up and say that, and we're urging both sides -- republicans and democrats -- to recognize the pain has to be spread around. there's some things, patent controls that effects innovation. basically, people don't produce anything but lawyers. it's not really a good way to get a society. and from the smallest start-up to the biggest economy everyone's saying we need more certainty, you shouldn't be putting people out of work in actively-of run companies if they're don't even think they're breaking someone's patent. there has to be some ce
and robert kennedy, were trying to attach to the bill a constitutional amendmentle outlawing the poll tax. this was something that needed to be done, obviously. the attorney general katzenback feared the courts were going to say it's unconstitutional. you have to do it by an amendment. you can't do it this way. and so there was going to be a critical vote in which it was possible that the democratic liberals and the republican liberals were going to attach this thing on. what bothered the administration was they barely had the votes, 67 votes, to defeat a southern filibuster. and if they couldn't break the southern filibuster, there would be no legislation. so, johnson called up dr. king -- i urge all of you to get some of these tapes and listen to them. the conversations between king and johnson are absolutely priceless. and johnson said, dr. king, -- because king wanted to support this plan. he says, well, dr. king you have to make up your own mind of -- about who you want to trust, who you want to think is representing your cause, and if you believe you want to support this amendment a
of treaties. the u.n. treaty and the law of the sea, which could actually do direct taxes and collect their own money from the member states. they could actually not collect money for transactions in the sea. so we first with members who are opposing the law of the sea treaty or of questions about it. there's a disabled rights treaty, which is another -- being very aware days, in fact the new senator from texas who probably will be elected was the attorney general with a major figure in the maybe in case, which is a major case in international law, the state of texas to fight with president bush and the u.s. state department and the u.n. he was the attorney general u.s. senator for senator cruise probably. so there is the dvd. this action going on. >> i myself would follow that because in your description of the nature of the global governance movement, it was a strongly believe this movement. you mentioned presidents of universities, law schools, international lawyers, ngos. everybody who works for the e.u. and so, my question would be a little more specific. what is the social base
propaganda tax was to inflate the numbers of your enemy and deflate your own. >> i had a question kind of along the same lines as an organized effort in propaganda leading up to the world. it occurs to me that it shall occasions he read about certain individuals meeting at print shops, the adams coach at on your blog, this morning, john. so i wonder how prevalent was organized efforts to propagandize the newspapers. then the other side of that, who is financing some of these things? newspapers are pretty obvious, printers are making money but then when things like broadsided monsters but who was funding, was it a super pac from the patriot side that is financing certain broadside, who's paying the piper in that? >> okay, i'll start with the question of meeting at newspaper offices. this was -- gary mentioned i quoted a little bit of john adams in 1769, in his diary where he spends the evening at the office of the prints up with a grading the boston gazette. samuel adams was there and a man named william davis and possibly james soda. and they were cooking up things for next day's newsp
of the banks over, you know, whether taxes go up on the ridge or don't go up on the rich. don't say these are not unimportant but their tactical, in immediate measures involved in a strategic -- i think barack obama is very clear about, and is determined to pursue, and god help us, then they did succeed in doing. [inaudible] >> i just want to add briefly, about those who love america and bill buckley, showing that how much you could love america and still notice the flaws. that is the line from the genesis in which he says this mixed up much of the time, and yet still worth everything to# them. >> of course it has flaws. everything has flaws. everything human has flaws. the question is which emphasize. and what has been emphasized in our culture for, well, 40 years now with increasing intensity is the flaws. i mean, you've got several generations of kids who have been educated to believe that this country stinks, that it was born in sin and continued to pursue evil objectives, et cetera, et cetera.c that's why i keep harping on this issue. i still think it is the major issue facing
for a loop and took control of the house. and then everything that happened after that. the tax cut deal, the big fights over the budget and the dealt ceiling and deficit -- the debt ceiling, deficit reduction, also the bin laden raid and what happened in egypt and libya. and so i'm looking at how obama made the decisions he made and took -- why he took the actions he took in that very pear rillous time -- perilous time for him politically. but i also explained how this is all done in a way to set up the 2012 campaign that we just went through. he had a theory, after he took that big hit in 2010, he had a theory that he could make the 2012 race a choice not just between him and mitt romney, but a choice between different ideologies, different approaches to government, between different sets of visions and values. and everything he did, um n that time frame he kept trying to tether to this big idea he had about a choice. and when i wrote
, it was $b 25,000. i work for the government -- [inaudible] my after-tax dollars. so it just seems to me that the government should be doing something to keep tuitions in check. not necessarily turn into a european system, but who are these magical doctors who are going to descend upon america and provide health care to everyone when it's 70 grand a year for one year of tuition, and you may have undergrad loans, and you're going to be taking out conceivably 300 grand for medical school? >> right. for c-span, do we need to repeat question, or are we okay? repeat the question? so the question is, um, how are we going to help young people make it through, um, you know, their educational goals, college or graduate school, in light of runaway tuition. >> yes. >> is that right? okay. do you want -- >> and also -- [inaudible] >> right. >> i mean, how are we going to get the doctors if tuition is 70 grand a year? >> we write in the booking about how -- in the book about how hard it is for homeless kids in the cities in which they live today just get through high school. the challenge that so man
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)